or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by SmileyDude

There is one huge difference though -- Apple is providing the technology for others to use.  This would be like getting pulled over by the cops for speeding because the taxi driver you hired is speeding. 
Really, it doesn't matter how the deal was structured -- perhaps Apple had to buy both entities to get the deal to happen. If all they cared about was Beats Music, if they really wanted to get their hands on it, they would have to spend $3B either way. Trying to figure out how much money they spent on which part is as pointless as trying to figure out how much money you spent on each of your kids during the past year...
I don't think that Apple moving the MBA to ARM necessarily requires moving it to iOS as well -- these are independent things.  Apple could make a ARM64 port of OS X for a theoretical ARM based MBA and to the average user, it would look identical to as an Intel based one (similar to how Intel and PPC Macs were). One interesting trend I've noted over the past few OS X releases is that Apple has definitely been slimming down the OS.  An install of Mavericks on a friends...
 There is one reason why Apple might do it -- Apple can squeeze out more profit/lower prices if they use an A-series chip on their laptops.  Combined with the ability to customize the GPU and other functionality on their own chip, they would be able to put together a system that better meets their needs than using Intel's solution. And combined with the rumors of Apple possibly using Intel's fabs, some of those other advantages would carry of as well.
Not if they've convinced them all to ditch cable as well.
But that's not really a good criteria -- for example, I was out of work for a few months many years ago and I spent those months brushing up on new skills. I didn't apply for any jobs during that time.  At the end, I was able to find a job using those new skills.  If I had applied for that job right after the previous job, I would not have been qualified for it and most likely would not have gotten it. My point is that just because someone has been unemployed doesn't mean...
Presumably if Starbucks wasn't using encryption for the network connection, we would've heard about this already as well since the app was under scrutiny by a security researcher. Also it's likely that the team that works on the network side of thing is completely different than the team that worked on the iOS app. If the servers already required encryption on their end, the iOS app would've had to use it. Most likely, whoever developed the iOS app just wasn't aware of...
On a more serious note, I don't understand how they missed this to begin with.  Apple provides the keychain for storing exactly this kind of sensitive data.  It's not a super easy API to use, but there are plenty of wrappers out there and it's certainly something that shouldn't take more than a few hours to get working. I've implemented it myself in a few apps, so I'm familiar with how long it would take to do.  A bigger project like the Starbucks app would certainly have...
Well they already stole your phone by this time -- why not let them slide on the coffee and cake and just focus on what's important?
New Posts  All Forums: